I didn't say it was against your MO. I don't know your MO. So without that information I have to go by what's in the thread, and to me it seemed like an overreaction to Zindy's allegations against you.
My MO is to "overract" to everything. (Well, not exactly. But you get what I mean.)
I agree, it's possible. But I think that it's awfully coincidental if an accident. For someone who might not be actively reading the thread, she was quickest to respond to day 2 starting and quickest to respond to my initial day 2 post. I'd be surprised to find that she just happened to find the thread open and started conversation on day 2, went away for a while, and just happened to check on the thread again right after my first post, and it would just happen to be that she had some night information about me that she decided to post right when she just happened to look at the thread and, behold!, I was the last person to post. Add to that she had asked a question of the players regarding WhoMe? in her first post; you think she wasn't checking to see what other players' responses were to that post?
It’s possibly awfully coincidental as well as it is definitely unprovable, unless we ask HK and trust her to be honest. For example, the other day, I saw this post, but didn’t get to respond because I got a phone call and by the time I finished, it was time for bed. Timing issues are a mess.
But, I could concede this entire argument and I don’t feel like it’d do much.
You're stretching here. Look at my post (#142). Do you see anything there that might have triggered that kind of reaction? I simply posted my *investigation* results and my reasons for targeting you. How this would give her something that would cause her doubt about my claim is beyond me. I do find it interesting that you're feeding her excuses for her actions instead of letting her answer them herself, though.
If you had not posted something that might changed the outcome of your result, or would possibly create more results.
You are (or heavily imply that you are) voting Ms. HK on the basis that we are scummates. I am defending myself through "defending" her as I am arguing against the connection. Parts of this do not seem to include me, but are used to formulate your foundations to suspect me. Thus, I must argue against what builds the foundation. I am not defending HK as I am defending myself against the possible HK/PK scum group.
(As an aside, a particular role sticks out in my mind here as to why all things could be truth but you were at the same time leaving something out making HK suspicious.)
Care to share? Of all the possible roles Alko had to choose from you probably won't be giving anything away, considering you might not have any more information about a players specific role than anyone else in the game, but you do have a better familiarity of the working set of possible roles than the rest of us. In fact, you have several times in this game claimed you could *think* of a role that might do this or that, but then you haven't given that information to the players. If you were town, I think it would be better to be forthcoming with these ideas that don't stem from your role in this game, rather than cloaking them in ambiguity.
If I was town, I wouldn’t want to claim for people without their approval. Let’s say I’m right about my suspicions, and I post what role could fill this niche. This alerts the scum to a power role.
To be honest, though, if the role I am thinking of is HK, then HK is being unreasonable, and it’s not as much a lie as it is a “sin of omission.”
Third, if HK said beforehand that she thought you were lying, you could adapt
your
claim around it.
And how exactly would I do that? If she said I was lying about something, would I then change the claim I had made? After saying that I had claimed fully? That would have gone over real well for me, wouldn't it.
Well, I probably shouldn’t have used the word claim. I meant the results and particular scenario of your role. For example, if you have a scum buddy that is a burglar that is feeding you information, but you yourself are playing a role that does not go outside of the house or do an action. HK is a tracker and sees that you did not leave the house, even though you posted accurate information.
Remember, you
are
a claimed miller. These things aren’t beyond the stretch of imagination for someone with an investigation result.
Please also try to look at this from the viewpoint of a neutral party for the sake of hypothetical discussions.
Agree here, we could be being bastard-modded to hell. But I can't play thinking that everything that happens in thread might be backwards than I what I think I see.
Right. But we must not walk right into traps as well. A moderate balance is needed.
Huh? Since when can scum talk out of thread during the day phase?
That’s what I get for
ass out of u and me
, apparently. All of the games I’ve played in for a long stretch have been “scum can talk during day.” I research the subject of the last game I was in that Alko hosted and indeed…
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> <><><><><><><><><><>
LatentSanity(Zindaras) –. You are LatentSanity, Psyhiatric Hospital Staff, Mafia Aligned.
You are mafia with Nis, MT_Gunn and _Sacred_. Nis is MiDra, the Chief of the Psychiatric Hospital Staff, MT_Gunn is Wizo_Chaos, a staff member, and _Sacred_ is Rhox, an Insane Staff member recruited for your services.
You may only speak to each other at night.
You, MT_Gunn, and Nis may speak at night with each other, however you may not speak directly to _Sacred_. _Sacred_ was in fact one of the insane members, before you realized that you could use his insanity to your benefit. The only problem with this is you are forced to keep limited communication with _Sacred_, and do so by sending him messages. Send the message you want to send to _Sacred_ to me, and I’ll pass it off to _Sacred_. You two have chosen this method of conversation with _Sacred_ because as he is insane, Nis says he can’t be fully trusted.
Nis has recruited you because he knew you would be loyal, and that he could trust you to help him remove the insanity that has spread everywhere from PK. You would do anything for Nis, and help him remove this threat any way possible.
You win when the rest of the town has been put in an insane asylum.
Notes: Sane. LatentSanity, Psychiatric Mafia Aligned Psychiatric Hospital Staff. When turned insane. Becomes lost and confused. Loses contact with the rest of the mafia, but is still a part of it.
Oh well. Rather helpful part of my argument. Pity.
Did I miss something? This whole argument doesn't make sense because scum can't talk to each other out of thread. Unless Alko is allowing it in this game... which means that only scum would know about it... hmmm.
I’ll rescind my argument, as it seems Alko has established pro scum not being able to talk during the day, unless he would care to clarify that in thread.
Using that as evidence is kind of silly. You could easily say only pro town would make that mistake as pro scum would know in advance that they could talk during night only. I wouldn’t take it as an indicator either way.
You are correct, it does hinge on HurriKaty playing poorly. But to me it makes
more sense
than us both being town.
My problem with your assumption is that you think it makes sense that I and HK are scum together. I don’t disagree that HK’s actions are weird, especially from your vantage point. From
your
standpoint assuming pro town, obviously there is something very odd with HK going on. From what we apparently know, HK is playing irrationally…regardless of alignment. I see how you could easily find HK to be pro scum, but the link you provided is very weak at best as it assumes namely a lot of things, most of which would be that she would play badly by not wait for myself to respond and knee jerking.
Now, if she can give a legitimate case that I can deal with (and I will be able to deal with it if it's legitimate) and it makes sense with us both being town then I will reconsider my vote and investigative direction. For now I see a player who specifically tried to call into question my role, flat out told us that her distrust was based on a role power, then was unable to substantiate her claims, wasn't able to tell if I was lying about a lot or a little or anything at all, and otherwise injected a lack of clarity into the discussion. Muddying the waters is a scum-tactic. Of course I see it through a much stricter viewpoint than you do because I know I'm telling the truth about my role, and I see a player who is doing a poor job of justifying trying to break the town's confidence in my claim. Here's what it comes down to. I claimed a town-aligned burglar role who showed guilty to investigations. The only thing I could be lying about is what my alignment is. She couldn't get that from a night action. I'd either show guilty or non-guilty, in which case she should be more worried about her sanity than about me *lying*. NO ONE IN THEIR RIGHT MIND WHO IS TOWN ALIGNED WOULD CLAIM TO SHOW GUILTY TO INVESTIGATIONS IF THEY DIDN'T. The only other option is that I am lying about being a Burglar. Obviously I am not, because you have already substantiated that my *investigation* of you was legitimate. So either you and I are scum together or I am a burglar. What else could I be lying about?
1: You could be lying about being a burglar if you have a scum buddy who is a burglar or you are a name cop. Thus, let’s say HK is a tracker. Checks you out, finds you don’t make a choice, but get a true investigation. Leads to some odd times.
2: False dilemmas, sir, false dilemmas. You are saying that this is true or this is true. It is entirely possible that all three of us are pro town due to bastardness, (Some particular bastard things pop into my mind here; you aren’t really a miller but are told you are one, insane cop investigation finding you pro town due to millerness…all possible situations) or that you and HK are pro scum putting on a jolly good distancing show and in the process are making me look bad as an eventual final target. Thinking in that kind of confined space will only lead to trouble. As unlikely as certain things are, if we assume for sure it isn’t, we are playing a risky game.
3: I don’t agree with what HK has decided to, which is to hint repeatedly as if it was some super tell that needed no more information. In a bastard game, that’d be silly. HK should have realized it was either claim or not, because doing what she has been doing has only gotten her in trouble and not really lead us anywhere with you.
Now obviously, I’ll agree that from your viewpoint that HK is worth a vote on the basis she is accusing you of being a liar and assuming pro townness, you know yourself to not be one and therefore
she
is lying. That’s how such things go. (Assuming no bastard.) However, I still believe that your link to me and HK is based on a lot of ifs and nothing really substantial. What if HK is mafia and believed me incorrectly to be the SK from that investigation, and thought the burglar is a major threat, which lead to the hypothetical knee jerk? Very unlikely, I’d say, but I wouldn’t say it’s much more far fetched than the string you’ve proposed.
